sustainability

Article
Identification of Factors Affecting the Performance of
Rural Road Projects in Colombia
Adriana Gómez-Cabrera 1,2, * , Amalia Sanz-Benlloch 3 , Laura Montalban-Domingo 3 ,
Jose Luis Ponz-Tienda 1 and Eugenio Pellicer 3
1 Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Universidad de los Andes, 111711 Bogotá, Colombia;
jl.ponz@uniandes.edu.co
2 Civil Engineering Department, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, 111711 Bogotá, Colombia
3 Construction Project Management Research Group, Universitat Politècnica de València, Camino de Vera s/n,
46022 Valencia, Spain; asanz@upv.es (A.S.-B.); laumondo@upv.es (L.M.-D.); pellicer@upv.es (E.P.)
* Correspondence: ca.gomez1@uniandes.edu.co




Received: 11 July 2020; Accepted: 25 August 2020; Published: 9 September 2020


Abstract: Rural roads play an indispensable role in economic and social well-being, especially in
developing countries, contributing to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. For this reason,
it is necessary to plan these projects properly to guarantee their success. In this line, the objective of this
research is to identify significant variables generating overruns in time and cost using empirical data
of 535 rural road projects in Colombia from 2015 to 2018. Bivariate analysis, with statistical tools like
Spearman’s Rho and Kruskal–Wallis, allowed identifying that higher values of variables like budget
and project intensity are related to higher deviations in cost and time. Additionally, it was found
that projects with shorter durations are reporting higher time overruns. The worst performers are
projects executed in the year that council mayors start their terms, those developed in municipalities
with more resources, and those awarded using a competitive bidding process. Multivariate analysis,
through Random Forest, assessed the effect of considering all variables interacting simultaneously
and ranking them in order of importance. The results demonstrated a relationship between cost
and time performance, and that numerical variables are more significant than the categorical ones.
This study contributes to a better understanding of the causes of delays and cost overruns on rural
roads, providing useful insight for researchers and industry practitioners.

Keywords: rural roads; cost overruns; time overruns; public projects; project management

1. Introduction
Rural areas comprise vast geographical regions where a significant population faces emerging
threats associated with a lack of infrastructure, particularly across developing countries [1].
Rural transport and their infrastructure play an indispensable role in the universal call of the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), which contribute to more than half of them. Rural roads
provide regional connectivity, reducing poverty and facilitating access to essential services. These goals
also promote building quality, reliable, sustainable, and resilient infrastructure [2]. Rural road networks
in low/middle-income countries are critical for economic and social well-being, and they are mostly
unpaved [3]. In developing countries, infrastructure quality deficiencies restrict mobility and overall
network connectivity [4]. Rural roads correspond to 69% of the entire network in Colombia, with a total
extension of 143,000 km. It is estimated that in the 281 municipalities of Colombia, only 6% are paved.
The absence of roads limits the opportunities and development of the regions, increasing poverty [5].
Due to the importance of rural roads, it is essential to plan them properly to guarantee a successful
project, defined as one that has achieved its technical performance, maintaining its initial schedule and

Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377; doi:10.3390/su12187377 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 2 of 18

budget [6]. However, deviations in time and cost are a global phenomenon on five continents and
have not decreased over the past 70 years [7].
The literature has included the magnitude and frequency of those deviations. An early study in
Hong Kong revealed that the mean percentage of time overrun is 14% for civil engineering projects
(infrastructure) [8]. Another study established that over 40% of Indian construction projects are facing
time overruns [9]. Regarding cost deviation, it has been found that 9 out of 10 transport infrastructure
projects around the world present this deviation [10]. Transportation projects in the United States
are identified as underestimated; approximately 50% of them have overrun their initial budgets [11].
These studies show that deviations do not correspond to a particular type of project or region and that
there are researchers worldwide interested in this topic.
There are also studies focused on reporting factors causing delays and cost overruns, according to
the stakeholders’ perception to indicate the frequency of occurrence, severity, or importance of each
possible cause to ranking the most significant factors [12]. Specifically, for road construction projects,
the results of a study in Zambia established that bad weather, scope changes, environmental protection,
schedule delay, and strikes, are the significant causes of cost escalation. For schedule delays, delays in
payments, financial processes, contract modification, economic problems, and materials procurement
were found to be the major causes [13]. The most significant causes of delay in road projects in
Palestine are the political situation, award project to the lowest bid price, progress payment delay by the
owner, and shortage of equipment [14]. Another study identified the causes of delays in road projects
in Malawi, including a shortage of fuel, insufficient contractor cash-flow, lack of foreign currency,
slow payment procedures, and insufficient equipment as the most significant [15]. Researchers in
Cambodia analyzed the delay factors, finding that rain and flood, land acquisition, the awarding of the
project to the lowest bidder, and equipment breakdowns are the most significant [16].
Other approaches consisted of identifying the impact of different variables in time and cost
overruns. In Taiwan, researchers examined how different causes work together to influence project
schedule delays using Structural Equation Modeling. The primary source of information was also the
perception of the stakeholders, and the results showed that the class of nonhuman-related causes is the
most significant, in which “unforeseen site conditions” is the most worthwhile [17]
Another study used the three-stage least-squares technique to analyze the impact in cost and
time overrun of nine variables for highway projects in Indiana (USA). Results identified the contract
size, project duration, expected weather conditions, and results of the competitive bidding process
as statistically significant and also demonstrated a simultaneous relationship between cost and time
overruns [18]. In Hong Kong, a study examined three variables: Project type, size of the project,
and length of the project implementation period; and their statistical relationship with cost overruns in
mega transport projects. The results showed that rail projects are most prone to cost increase, and road
projects are the least vulnerable. Cost overruns have no significant relationship with project size, but for
road projects, smaller-scale projects tend to be more prone to more considerable cost overruns [19].
Authors identified gaps like the absence of studies related to cost and time deviations in rural
road projects. Besides, most of the methods implemented in other project types, while allowing the
comparison of results and identification of significant trends, their primary source of information is the
opinion of stakeholders. A new approach is proposed in this research, considering the importance
of rural road projects and their contribution to the achievement of sustainable development goals.
The goal is to analyze empirical data of rural road construction projects available through the Colombian
Government’s open data platform, to identify which are the significant variables causing cost and time
deviations in this project type. The database includes projects that have completed their closing phase,
all project work is finalized, and the scope has been achieved. The contracting method corresponds to
Design–Bid–Build, the traditional delivery method where the agency contracts separately for design
and construction services [20], and the research is focused in the construction stage. The structure of
the paper is as follows: Section 2 describes the research method, including the data collection and the
identification of the variables. Section 3 presents the results indicating the main variables generating
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 19

Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 3 of 18

data collection and the identification of the variables. Section 3 presents the results indicating the
main variables generating cost and time overruns through univariate, bivariate, and multivariate
analysis.
cost Section
and time 4 presents
overruns throughan interpretation of the results,
univariate, bivariate, citing agreement
and multivariate analysis.orSection
disagreement
4 presentswith
an
previous studies.
interpretation Finally,
of the Section
results, citing 5agreement
discussesor thedisagreement
main conclusions, including
with previous the implications
studies. of the
Finally, Section 5
findings and
discusses the recommendations
main conclusions, for future research.
including the implications of the findings and recommendations for
future research.
2. Research Methods and Data Collection
2. Research Methods and Data Collection
To achieve the goals stated in the previous section, the authors followed the overall research
methodTo achieve
summarizedthe goals stated1.inThe
in Figure the first
previous
stage section,
was thethe dataauthors followed
collection, the with
starting overall research
a literature
method summarized in Figure 1. The first stage was the data collection, starting with
review for identifying the variables considered in previous research related to cost and time overruns. a literature review
for identifying
Next, the variables
data gathering consideredincluding
was performed, in previous research
a web searchrelated to cost
for road and time overruns.
construction projects, in Next,
the
data
opengathering was performed,
data platform including
of the Colombian a web search
Government, andfor road construction
filtering projects,Projects
rural road projects. in the open data
awarded
platform
through theof the Colombian
three Government,
types of competitive and filtering
processes rural
allowed byroad projects.
Colombian Projects
law awarded
were also chosen. through
These
the three types
processes of competitive
included competitive processes
bidding, allowed by Colombian
in which a contractor lawiswere also chosen.
selected in equalThese processes
opportunities;
included
abbreviated competitive
selection, bidding,
a simplifiedin which
process a contractor
carried outisafter
selected in equal
a public opportunities;
tender abbreviated
has been declared void;
selection, a simplified process carried out after a public tender has been declared
and minimum contract, the quickest and most straightforward procedure for low contract values [21]. void; and minimum
contract, the quickest
In the second and most in
stage, variables straightforward
the dataset were procedure
analyzed for through
low contract values [21]. data
an exploratory In theanalysis,
second
stage,
identifying their nature and main features. It was also developed the outlier´s identification, andtheir
variables in the dataset were analyzed through an exploratory data analysis, identifying the
nature and main
descriptive features.
statistics wereItobtained
was also through
developed the outlier´s
univariate identification,
analysis. Finally, and the descriptive
the third statistics
stage consisted of
were obtained through
the identification of the univariate
significant analysis.
variables Finally,
causingthetimethird
andstage consisted of
cost deviations inthe identification
rural road projects,of
the significant
applying variables
bivariate, causing time
and multivariate and costtools.
statistical deviations in rural
All models road projects,
developed in this applying
research werebivariate,
built
and
using multivariate
free software statistical tools. All
R, and Python. Anmodels
in-depthdeveloped in this
explanation research
of these stepswere built using
is included freefollowing
in the software
R, and Python. An in-depth explanation of these steps is included in the following paragraphs.
paragraphs.

Figure 1. Research method.

Based onGransberg
Based on GransbergandandVillarreal
Villarreal [22],
[22], thethe research
research team
team defined
defined the dependent
the dependent variables,
variables, time
time deviation, and cost deviation, identifying projects that required change orders to increase
deviation, and cost deviation, identifying projects that required change orders to increase the initialthe
initial
cost orcost or deadline
deadline (see Equations
(see Equations (1) and(1) and (2)).
(2)).

𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙
Final𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒
deadline −−original
𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒
deadline
𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
Time deviation== (1)
(1)
𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒
original deadline

Final cost − contract value

Cost deviation = (2)
contract value
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 4 of 18

Later, the research team explored the data included in the platform of the Colombian Government
(www.datos.gov.co). Filtering by road projects, and by reviewing the contractual object, it was possible
to extract 555 projects related to rural roads in the period 2015–2018. Next, the research team identified
variables involved in previous studies related to cost and time deviations and looked for the availability
of them in the data. An exploratory analysis allowed obtaining information about the variables
and their nature. Table 1 describes these variables, their nature, and description, how they were
measured for numerical variables, and the values for the categorical ones. The variables are organized
following the life cycle management in infrastructure projects [23]. The project initiation phase contains
eight variables: Project type, owner, geographic location, municipality type, period of execution,
estimated cost (budget), original deadline, and project intensity; the project planning phase includes
four variables: Contract value, award growth, process type, and contractor type; and the project
execution and closure phase has four variables: Additional cost, additional time, final cost, and final
deadline. Variables related to cost were converted to legal monthly minimum salaries in Colombia;
this is an official value established by the Government each year that allows considering the effect of
inflation. In this research, this unit is included as Minimum Salaries for variables related to cost.
Then, the sample characterization was developed, obtaining the descriptive statistics for the
numerical variables and the frequency and percentage for the different groups of the categorical
variables. This characterization also allowed finding trends, outliers, and getting information about
variability in the dataset. In this stage, the interquartile range method (IQR) was applied for the
numerical variables to identify and eliminate extreme outliers, which are unique values in the dataset.
It can bias statistical analyses [27]. This method defined the extreme outliers obtaining the first quartile
(Q1), the third quartile (Q3), and the IQR range of the data (See Equation (3)).

IQR= Q3 − Q1 (3)

Those pieces of data higher than Q3 + 3IQR and less than Q1 − 3IQR are considered outliers.
Eliminated projects were those with a high estimated cost (more than 2500 minimum salaries) and with
a positive award growth (which is also not possible under Colombian laws). Therefore, 535 projects
were finally included in the research.
Next, a bivariate analysis established the relationship between the independent variables and
the dependent variables time and cost deviation. Different tools were chosen considering the type
of the variables, analyzing the hypothesis test of each one, determining the level of significance, and
also calculating the p-value. A p-value ≤ 0.05 indicates in this study strong evidence to reject the
null hypothesis [28]. Spearman’s Rho, a nonparametric test (because the data do not fit a normal
distribution), was calculated to compare time and cost deviations with each numerical variable [29,30].
Spearman’s Rho varies from −1.00 to +1.00, where 1 means a perfect linear positive correlation, and −1
means a perfect linear negative relationship [28]. The null hypothesis, in this case, is that there is no
association between the two variables.
On the other hand, the nonparametric test Kruskal–Wallis was implemented to compare each
one of the categorical variables with time and cost deviation. The nonparametric behavior between
the data corresponding to each category was verified. This test analyzes if there is any difference
in the median values of groups or treatments. In this research, those involved in the categorical
variables [31]. The null hypothesis, in this case, is that the population medians are equal for all groups.
Kruskal–Wallis allows identifying if groups involved in the categorical variables present a different
behavior concerning the dependent variables analyzed. However, it does not determine for which
groups the difference is statistically significant, so the Wilcoxon test was used to compare paired
data and establish it. The null hypothesis, in this case, is that the median difference between pairs of
observations is zero, so this allowed the identification of categories with similar behavior that can be
grouped [32].
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 5 of 18

Table 1. Independent variables.

Phase Variable (Type) Description Unit/Values Source

Project type Construction or
The main project object. [7,18,19]
(Categorical) Maintenance
The entity, or stakeholder,
Owner Municipality or
responsible for contracting [24]
(Categorical) Other
the project.
Geographic Amazonia, Andina,
Colombian regions where the
Location Caribe, Orinoquia, [10,25]
project takes place.
(Categorical) or Pacifica
Class stated by Colombian law. Type 1 to 6, 1 being
Municipality Type
(According to their number of the highest
(Categorical)
Project inhabitants and income). category
initiation
The period of project
Period Years: 2015, 2016,
execution, in this case, it was [10,25]
(Categorical) 2017, or 2018
established in years.
Estimated Cost Budgeted construction cost,
(Budget) determined at the time of Minimum salaries [7,19,25,26]
(Numerical) procurement by the owner.
The project planned duration,
Original Deadline
determined at the time of Days [18,24,25]
(Numerical)
procurement by the owner.
The ratio between the
Project Intensity Minimum
estimated cost and the [20]
(Numerical) salaries/days
original deadline.
Contract Value
The contract awarded amount. Minimum salaries [18,20]
(Numerical)
The ratio between the
Award Growth
difference of contract value Percentage (%) [20]
(Numerical)
and the estimated cost.
Project
planning Competitive
Modality chosen for the Bidding,
Process Type
contractor procurement Abbreviated
(Categorical)
and selection. Selection,
Minimum Contract
Individual,
Contractor Stakeholder responsible for
Consortium,
(Categorical) executing the project.
or Companies
The difference between the
Additional Cost
contract value and the final Minimum salaries [20,26]
(Numerical)
contract cost.
Difference between the
Project Additional Time
original deadline and the final Days [20]
execution (Numerical)
contract deadline.
and closure
Final Cost
Final contract cost. Minimum salaries [26]
(Numerical)
Final Deadline
Final contract deadline. Days [25]
(Numerical)

Finally, multivariate analysis, through the Random Forest (RF) technique, assessed the effect
of considering all variables interacting simultaneously [33]. Random Forest allows including both
numerical and categorical variables in the analysis; therefore, this technique avoids the process of
transformation or discretization of variables, which leads to loss of information [34,35] The advantages
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 6 of 18

of Random Forest also include an improvement in the understanding of variables since it classifies
them in order of importance considering their interaction, and even analyzes a nonlinear behavior of
the variables [36]. RF is an ensemble learning method that creates numerous decision trees. For each
decision tree, a random subset of samples (projects for this case study) and a random subset of variables
are considered. It aggregates the results and, after multiple iterations, gives the ranking of variable
importance [37].
On the other hand, as the dependent variables are numerical, regression trees are implemented.
Those are built by recursively partitioning the sample into homogenous groups. Each split is based on
the values of a variable, and it is selected according to the maximum reduction of the overall impurity
of the node achieved. The impurity is measured as the total sum of squared deviations from node
centers [38].
In the Random Forest algorithm, two control parameters are included: The number of trees used
in the forest, and the number of random variables used in each tree. One-third of the observations are
not used to fit the model and are used to validate it. The Out-of-bag error score (OOB) is the error
computed on samples not included during training [39]. An optimal number of trees is obtained by
reviewing the model performance, looking for a threshold from which increases in the number of
trees would bring no significant performance gain, and would only increase the computational cost.
Previous literature suggests that a random forest should have several trees between 64 and 128 [40].
An optimal number of predictors is obtained after running the optimal number of trees and testing
how OOB error changes according to the number of random attribute candidates in each tree and
selecting which reduces it [39]. After running the models, RF extracts a summary of the importance of
each variable, considering how the normalized error increases when it is eliminated. A large value
indicates an important predictor [38].

3. Results

3.1. Univariate Analysis

This sub-section includes the sample characterization, describing the main information of the
variables involved in the dataset through univariate analysis. A description of the dependent variables,
time, and cost deviation is included in Table 2 for the 535 projects. For the time deviation, there is no
legal limitation, and there are projects with values up to 4.5. In Colombian public contracts, the cost
deviation should not be higher than 0.50 of the estimated cost [41]. However, one project reported 0.53
for cost deviation. Although the average of the data does not indicate a significantly high value, it is
essential to note that many projects have no deviation, and the median for both cases is zero.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of independent numerical variables.

Variable Min Max Mean Median Standard Deviation

Time deviation 0.00 4.50 0.19 0.00 0.50
Cost deviation 0.00 0.53 0.08 0.00 0.16

Figure 2 shows a higher variability in cost deviation data; the interquartile range (IQR) is
larger. Additionally, a considerable number of projects do not report deviations. Of the 535
projects, 144 (26.92%) report cost deviation, 124 (23.18%) report time deviation, and 82 reports
both simultaneously (15.33%).
Sustainability 2020, 12, x7377
FOR PEER REVIEW 77 of
of 19
18
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Boxplot for (a) time deviation and (b) cost deviation.
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Boxplot for
for (a)
(a) time
time deviation
deviation and
and (b)
(b) cost
cost deviation.
deviation.

If
If only the projects reporting
reporting anydeviation
deviation (186data)
data) areanalyzed,
analyzed,the themean
meanfor fortime
time deviation
If only
onlythetheprojects
projects reportingany any deviation(186(186 data)areare analyzed, the mean for timedeviation is
deviation
is 0.53,
0.53, and andforfor
costcost deviation,
deviation, it is it is 0.24 Table
0.24 (See Table 3). are
Data are right-skewed
for timefor time deviation; the
is 0.53, and for cost deviation, it is (See 3). Data
0.24 (See Table right-skewed
3). Data are right-skewed deviation;
for the median
time deviation; the
median
is is less
less than thethan
mean.theFor
mean.
costFor cost deviation,
deviation, the histogram
the histogram is close
is close to to symmetric; the mean and
median is less than the mean. For cost deviation, the histogram is symmetric; the mean
close to symmetric; and
the median
mean and
median
are closeare close other.
to each to each other.
median are close to each other.
Table
Table 3. Descriptive
Descriptive statistics
statistics of
of independent
independent variables for projects reporting deviation.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics of independent variables for projects reporting deviation.
VariableVariable Min Standard
MinMax Max Mean
Mean Median
Median Standard Deviation
Standard
Variable Min Max Mean Median Deviation
Time deviation 0.00 4.50 0.53 0.33 Deviation
0.72
Time deviation
Cost deviation 0.00 0.000.53 4.50 0.53
0.24 0.33
0.25 0.72
0.20
Time deviation 0.00 4.50 0.53 0.33 0.72
Cost deviation 0.00 0.53 0.24 0.25 0.20
Cost deviation 0.00 0.53 0.24 0.25 0.20
Regarding time deviation (Figure 3a), the boxplot shows that half of the data are between 0.33
Regarding time deviation (Figure 3a), the boxplot shows that half of the data are between 0.33
Regarding
and 4.5. timedeviation
For the cost deviation(Figure
(Figure3b),
3a),half
the of
boxplot shows
the data that half0.25
are between of the
anddata
0.53.are between 0.33
and 4.5. For the cost deviation (Figure 3b), half of the data are between 0.25 and 0.53.
and 4.5. For the cost deviation (Figure 3b), half of the data are between 0.25 and 0.53.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 3. Boxplot for projects reporting (a) time deviation and (b) cost deviation.
Figure 3.
Figure 3. Boxplot
Boxplot for
for projects
projects reporting
reporting (a)
(a) time
time deviation
deviation and
and (b)
(b) cost
cost deviation.
deviation.

A description of the independent numerical variables is included in Table 4. There are projects
A description
A descriptionof ofthe
theindependent
independentnumerical
numericalvariables
variablesis is included
included inin Table
Table 4. 4. There
There areare projects
projects of
of different cost and duration, and project intensity also presents a wide range in the values. Data are
of different
different costcost
andand duration,
duration, and and project
project intensity
intensity also
also presentsa awide
presents widerange
rangeininthe
thevalues.
values.Data
Data are
are
right-skewed for all variables since the median is less than the mean for all cases except for the award
right-skewedfor
right-skewed forall
all variables
variablessince
sincethe
the median
medianis is less
less than
than the
the mean
mean for
for all
all cases
cases except
except for
for the
the award
award
growth. Award growth is a variable that cannot have a value greater than zero; most cases are closer
growth. Award
growth. Awardgrowth
growthisisaavariable
variablethat
thatcannot
cannothave havea avalue
value greater
greater than
than zero;
zero; most
most cases
cases areare closer
closer to
to zero, but it reaches values as low as −0.29.
to zero,
zero, butbut it reaches
it reaches values
values as low
as low as −0.29.
as −0.29.
Concerning the categorical variables, the frequency and proportions are included in Figure 4.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics of independent numerical variables.
Table 4. Descriptive
Regarding the year, information statistics
from 2015 to 2018of independent
is considered.numerical
For thevariables.
project owner, the database
reports that more than 98% of cases are from a municipality. The rest of the cases are from department
governments or public agencies; therefore, this variable “Project owner” is not included in the statistical
analysis to avoid bias. In Colombia, municipalities are classified in categories from 1 to 6 depending
on the number of inhabitants and the income. Most of the municipalities are type 6 (the lowest).
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 8 of 18

Group “OTHER,” corresponds to Municipality 1 (0.19%), Municipality 3 (0.75%), and project developers
that are not municipalities (1.49%). Concerning contractors, most of the projects are carried out by
individual contractors, but also companies and consortiums are involved.

Table 4. Descriptive statistics of independent numerical variables.

Variable (Unit) Min Max Mean Median Standard Deviation

Estimated Cost (* MS) 25.60 2420.45 258.84 126.31 387.20
Contract Value (* MS) 19.69 2415.74 257.35 126.31 385.88
Additional Cost (* MS) 0.00 828.98 21.40 0.00 71.80
Final Cost (* MS) 21.44 3244.72 278.75 128.57 419.06
Original Deadline (Days) 5.00 240.00 63.18 60.00 38.38
Additional Time (Days) 0.00 196.00 9.28 0.00 22.50
Final Deadline (Days) 5.00 361.00 72.46 60.00 47.11
Project Intensity (* MS/Day) 0.23 69.16 4.05 2.24 5.79
Award Growth (%) −0.29 0.00 −0.01 0.00 0.03
* MS: Minimum Salaries.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 19

Year Municipality Type

Contractor Region

Process Type Project Type

Figure 4. Univariate
Figure4. analysis
Univariate analysis of categorical
of categorical variables.
variables.

3.2. Identification of Significant Variables through Bivariate Analysis

This sub-section includes the results for bivariate analysis comparing time and cost deviations
with each one of the independent variables. First, Spearman’s Rho was calculated for the numerical
variables. Then, the Kruskal–Wallis test was included for the categorical variables, complemented
with the Wilcoxon test for the significant ones.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 9 of 18

Regarding the geographic location, Colombia is divided into five regions, “Andina,”
which corresponds to the most populated and economically active area of the country, concentrates the
majority of projects with more than 77%. Regarding process type, abbreviated selection has the majority
with more than 52%, and competitive bidding has the smallest proportion. In respect of project type,
more than 67% corresponds to maintenance projects, those related to existing roads, and others consist
of new construction.

3.2. Identification of Significant Variables through Bivariate Analysis

This sub-section includes the results for bivariate analysis comparing time and cost deviations
with each one of the independent variables. First, Spearman’s Rho was calculated for the numerical
variables. Then, the Kruskal–Wallis test was included for the categorical variables, complemented with
the Wilcoxon test for the significant ones.

3.2.1. Matrix Correlation

The analysis of the correlation is included in a matrix for the numerical variables, calculating the
Spearman’s Rho
Sustainability 2020, 12,(See
x FORFigure 5). The color blue means a positive relationship, and red negative,
PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
the higher the intensity of the color, the higher the correlation. Variables highly correlated (more than
0.90) are time
contract value,deviation
estimated with additional
cost with thetime,
finalcost deviation
cost, contractwith additional
value with thecost,
finalestimated
cost, andcost with
original
contract
deadlinevalue,
with estimated cost with the
the final deadline. final cost,
Highly contract
correlated value with
variables weretheeliminated
final cost, and
for original
further deadline
analysis,
with
takingtheinto
final deadline.
account Highly
for time correlated
deviation: Thevariables
estimated were
cost,eliminated for further
the additional cost, theanalysis, taking into
award growth, the
account
original for time deviation:
deadline, The estimated
and the project intensity,cost,
and the additional
for cost cost,
deviation the award
taking growth,the
into account theestimated
original
deadline, and the project
cost, the additional time, intensity,
the awardand for cost
growth, thedeviation taking into
original deadline, andaccount the estimated
the project intensity.cost,
The
the additionalof
significance time,
thethe award growth,
correlation the original
was obtained deadline,
through theand the project
p-value, withintensity.
a thresholdThe significance
of 0.05. A
of the correlation
comparison betweenwas variables
obtained through
cost andthetimep-value, withgot
deviation a threshold of 0.05.
a Spearman′s RhoAof comparison
0.47 with abetween
p-value
variables
less thancost0.01,and time deviation
indicating a positive Spearman0 sbetween
got aassociation Rho of 0.47
costwith p-value
anda time less thanthat
deviation 0.01,
is indicating a
statistically
positive association
significant. between cost and time deviation that is statistically significant.

Figure 5. Matrix
Figure 5. Matrix correlation
correlation for
for numerical
numerical variables.
variables.

3.2.2. Time Deviation

This section first includes the significant numerical variables regarding the time deviation,
according to Spearman’s Rho. Variables belonging to all phases of the project life cycle were identified
(See Table 5), and the original deadline was identified as non-significant. The additional cost
correlates with a higher value. Project intensity and estimated cost have a similar relationship with
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 10 of 18

3.2.2. Time Deviation

This section first includes the significant numerical variables regarding the time deviation,
according to Spearman’s Rho. Variables belonging to all phases of the project life cycle were identified
(See Table 5), and the original deadline was identified as non-significant. The additional cost correlates
with a higher value. Project intensity and estimated cost have a similar relationship with the dependent
variable and award growth a weaker negative relationship.

Table 5. Significant correlations for time deviation.

Phase Variable Spearman0 s Rho p-Value

Project intensity 0.23 <<0.01
Project initiation
Estimated cost 0.21 <<0.01
Project planning Award growth −0.09 0.00
Project execution and closure Additional cost 0.48 <<0.01

For categorical variables, the procedure for implementing the Kruskal–Wallis test allowed the
identification of four significant variables belonging to the project initiation and the project planning
phases: Year, region, municipality type, and process type. For these variables, the Wilcoxon test was
implemented to compare paired data and define new groups, see Table 6. For each group, the minimum,
the maximum, and the mean is included. Regarding the year, the behavior of 2016 is significantly
different from the others. This year corresponds to that in which the council mayors begin their
governments of four years. The mean of the year 2016 is higher than others, and these groups also
contained the maximum deviation. This result requires further analysis to determine if it corresponds
to the lack of evolution of the learning curve or other factors, as the percentage of projects developed
in this year (17.94%) is not significantly different from the others.

Table 6. Significant categorical variables for time deviation.

Phase Variable New Categories Min Max Mean

2016 0.00 4.50 0.37
Year
Other 0.00 3.00 0.15
Project Other 0.00 4.50 0.20
Region
initiation Pacifica 0.00 1.50 0.05
Other 0.00 3.00 0.35
Municipality type
Type 6 0.00 4.50 0.15
Project Competitive bidding 0.00 3.00 0.28
Process type
planning No competitive bidding 0.00 4.50 0.16

Regarding region, “Pacifica” (10.28% of the cases), with a high level of poverty and rurality, shows a
better performance in terms of time deviation with a lower value of the mean. Regarding municipalities,
“Type 6” (81.87% of the cases) is significantly different from the others. These municipalities with a
low budget and limited resources are reporting a better behavior in time deviation, indicating a lower
value for the mean. Finally, for process type, competitive bidding is significantly different from the
others. Minimum contract and abbreviated selection have a similar behavior regarding time deviation
and can be grouped. It was found that competitive bidding (20.56% of the cases) had a higher value of
the mean.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 11 of 18

3.2.3. Cost Deviation

Significant correlations between cost deviation and the independent numerical variables are
included in Table 7. All the correlations are positive, the highest being additional time, explained by the
relationship between the two deviations. Estimated cost and project intensity also show that the higher
the values of these variables, the greater the differences. Award growth and the original deadline were
identified as non-significant.

Table 7. Significant numerical variables for cost deviation.

Phase Variable Spearman0 s Rho p-Value

Project intensity 0.11 0.01
Project initiation
Estimated cost 0.12 0.00
Project execution and closure Additional time 0.47 <<0.01

For the categorical variables, the procedure for implementing the Kruskal–Wallis test allowed the
identification of three significant variables: Year, municipality, and process type. For these variables,
the Wilcoxon test was performed (see Table 8). The year 2016 (in which the council mayors begin their
governments) reports a different behavior. Statistical metrics show that the mean of 2016 is higher from
others, and this group also contained the maximum value. These results, similar to time deviation,
require further analysis that allows understanding the reasons.

Table 8. Significant categorical variables for cost deviation.

Phase Variable New Categories Min Max Mean

2016 0.00 0.53 0.16
Year
Project Other 0.00 0.50 0.07
initiation Other 0.00 0.53 0.14
Municipality type
Type 6 0.00 0.50 0.07
Project Competitive bidding 0.00 0.53 0.09
Process type
planning No competitive bidding 0.00 0.50 0.08

Regarding municipalities, “Type 6” (81.87% of the cases) is significantly different from the others,
similar to time deviation. The mean cost deviation has a higher value for municipalities different
than “Type 6”. Regarding process type, competitive bidding is significantly different from the others.
Competitive bidding has a slightly higher mean of cost deviation and the maximum value.

3.3. Identification of Significant Variables through Multivariate Analysis

This section includes the results for multivariate analysis, through applying Random Forest,
to compare time and cost deviation with all the independent variables interacting together.

3.3.1. Time Deviation

This analysis aggregate results from the previous ones, considering only no-highly correlated
numerical variables: Estimated cost, additional cost, award growth, original deadline, and project
intensity. For categorical variables, there were included: Year, municipality type, process type,
project type, region, and contractor. The new confirmed groups for these variables were considered,
aggregating results of Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon analysis. In the Random Forest model for time
deviation, a comparison of the error reduction and the number of trees determine the optimal number
of trees, in this case, 92.
 numerical variables: Estimated cost, additional cost, award growth, original deadline, and project
intensity. For categorical variables, there were included: Year, municipality type, process type, project
type, region, and contractor. The new confirmed groups for these variables were considered,
aggregating results of Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon analysis. In the Random Forest model for time
Sustainability
deviation,2020, 12, 7377
a comparison of the error reduction and the number of trees determine the optimal number 12 of 18

of trees, in this case, 92.

Then,92
Then, 92trees
treeswere
werebuilt,
built,selecting
selectingvariables
variablesandanddata
datarandomly.
randomly.After Afterrunning
runningthethedifferent
different
models, an optimal number of four predictors is obtained, according to the reduction
models, an optimal number of four predictors is obtained, according to the reduction of the Out-of-bag of the Out-of-
bag error
error (oob_mse),
(oob_mse), see Figure
see Figure 6a. 6a. After,
After, thethe
mostmost important
important predictors
predictors areare ranked,considering
ranked, consideringthe the
increment in the Mean Squared Error (MSE) if the variable is eliminated (see Figure
increment in the Mean Squared Error (MSE) if the variable is eliminated (see Figure 6b). In this case, 6b). In this case,
onlynumerical
only numericalvariables
variablesare
areimportant
importantbeingbeingthetheadditional
additionalcost
costininthe
thefirst
firstplace,
place,followed
followedby bythethe
originaldeadline
original deadline that
that waswas not identified
not identified in theinprevious
the previous
analysis,analysis,
estimated estimated
cost, andcost, and
project project
intensity.
intensity.

(a) (b)
Figure6.6.Optimal
Figure Optimalnumber
numberofofpredictors
predictors(a)
(a)and
andsignificant
significantvariables
variables(b)
(b)for
fortime
timedeviation.
deviation.

The
Theoriginal
originaldeadline
deadlinewas
wasnot notidentified
identifiedasassignificant
significantininthe
thebivariate
bivariateanalysis,
analysis,and
andrandom
random
forest
forest ranks this variable in the second place of importance. A scatterplot for the original deadlineisis
ranks this variable in the second place of importance. A scatterplot for the original deadline
included
includedininFigure
Figure7.7.The
Theplot
plotindicates
indicatesthat
thataapartition
partitionisisaabetter
betteroption
optionfor
forthis
thisvariable
variable(for
(formore
more
than
than approximately 50 days of the original deadline, the behavior is different) because thishas
approximately 50 days of the original deadline, the behavior is different) because this hasaa
Sustainabilityresponse.
nonlinear 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 19
nonlinear response.

Figure
Figure 7. Scatterplot for
7. Scatterplot for time
time deviation
deviation and
and the
the original
original deadline.
deadline.

3.3.2. Cost Deviation

3.3.2. Cost Deviation
This analysis aggregates the results from the previous ones, considering only no-highly correlated
This analysis
numerical variables:aggregates
Estimated the
cost,results fromtime,
additional the award
previous ones,original
growth, considering onlyand
deadline, no-highly
project
correlated numerical variables: Estimated cost, additional time, award growth, original
intensity. For categorical variables, there were included: Year, municipality type, process type,deadline, and
project type,
project intensity. Forand
region, categorical variables,
contractor. The new there were included:
confirmed Year,
groups for municipality
significant type,were
variables process type,
included,
aggregating results of Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon analysis. In the Random Forest modelwere
project type, region, and contractor. The new confirmed groups for significant variables for
included, aggregating results of Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon analysis. In the Random
cost deviation, the optimal number of trees was 117, and the optimal number of two predictors is Forest model
for cost deviation,
obtained the8a).
(see Figure optimal
Afternumber
the mostofimportant
trees was predictors
117, and the
areoptimal
rankednumber of two
(see Figure 8b),predictors is
in this case,
obtained (see Figure 8a). After the most important predictors are ranked (see Figure 8b),
only numerical variables are important being the additional time in the first place, followed by thein this case,
only numerical variables are important being the additional time in the first place, followed by the
estimated cost.
estimated cost.
project intensity. For categorical variables, there were included: Year, municipality type, process type,
project type, region, and contractor. The new confirmed groups for significant variables were
included, aggregating results of Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon analysis. In the Random Forest model
for cost deviation, the optimal number of trees was 117, and the optimal number of two predictors is
obtained (see Figure 8a). After the most important predictors are ranked (see Figure 8b), in this13case,
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 of 18
only numerical variables are important being the additional time in the first place, followed by the
estimated cost.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 8.
8. Optimal
Optimal number
number of
of predictors
predictors (a)
(a) and
and significant
significant variables
variables (b) for cost deviation.

4. Discussion
4. Discussion
This study
This studyshows
showsfirst that,
first in Colombia,
that, in Colombia, the magnitude
the magnitudeand frequency of delays
and frequency of and cost and
delays overruns
cost
overruns in rural road construction projects are similar to global findings. However, thisinsights
in rural road construction projects are similar to global findings. However, this study provides study
about costinsights
provides and time overruns
about based
cost and timeonoverruns
publiclybased
available data, as available
on publicly opposed data,
to most
as previous
opposed to studies,
most
where results were gathered based on stakeholders’ perception. Notably, the
previous studies, where results were gathered based on stakeholders’ perception. Notably, the sample of 535 projects
used inofthis
sample 535research is also
projects used in higher than previous
this research research,
is also higher as described
than previous below.
research, Regarding
as described time
below.
deviation, this
Regarding timestudy foundthis
deviation, a mean
studypercentage
found a mean of 18.55%, considering
percentage all projects
of 18.55%, consideringincluded in the
all projects
database. This result is in line with early research in Hong Kong that revealed
included in the database. This result is in line with early research in Hong Kong that revealed a timea time overrun of
14% in infrastructure projects, comparing them with government building projects
overrun of 14% in infrastructure projects, comparing them with government building projects (9%) (9%) and private
building
and projects
private (17%)
building with a (17%)
projects samplewithsizeaofsample
111 projects
size of[8]. Other
111 research
projects reported
[8]. Other that 75%
research of the
reported
participating contractors and 70% of the participating consultants indicated
that 75% of the participating contractors and 70% of the participating consultants indicated thatthat the average delay
the
for road construction projects is between 10 and 30% of the original project duration
average delay for road construction projects is between 10 and 30% of the original project duration [14]. For cost
overruns,
[14]. thisoverruns,
For cost research this
found a meanfound
research percentage
a meanofpercentage
8.36%. Previous
of 8.36%.studies compared
Previous studiesthree levels
compared
of project complexity and the relationship with cost overruns, analyzing data reported in 22 primary
articles worldwide. Road projects were included in the medium complexity projects, reporting a
mean of cost overrun of 8.97% [42]. Other researchers analyzed data of 258 projects in 20 nations,
comparing different project types to determine the magnitude. Results showed that road projects
appear to be relatively less predisposed for cost escalation, although actual costs are higher than
estimated costs, with an average of 20.40% [7].
Another aspect to consider is that in this research, there are a significant number of projects that
do not report overruns. Considering only the projects reporting deviations, the mean percentage of
time overrun reaches values of 52.95% with a maximum of 450%. For cost overruns, it is 24.03%, with a
maximum of 53%, in this case, for the restriction in the Colombian law. Another study in Colombian
public infrastructure also has found delays as high as 342% of the original value [43]. Concerning cost
deviation for transport infrastructure projects in Asia, a maximum of 98.23% of the original contract
value was reported [44]. Higher values included 164% for the Dutch transport infrastructure project [26]
and 337% in infrastructure projects in Hong Kong [19]. However, other authors have reported that
there are no values greater than 100% of the original contract duration in road projects [14].
Regarding frequency, this study found 23.18% of projects reported time deviation and 26.92%
cost deviation. Other researchers established higher values; a study revealed that 40% of construction
projects are facing time overruns in India [9]. Concerning cost escalation, it has been found that 9 out
of 10 transportation infrastructure worldwide projects are underestimated [10], and 55% of the Dutch
transport infrastructure projects reported actual costs larger than estimated [26]. Although, in general,
the average values found in this research are similar to other studies, different project types and sizes
have been including, and most of the papers analyze individual countries. More research based on
empirical data in the future could help to compare results and determine the reasons for overruns.
Some authors mentioned that cost estimates used in decision-making for transport infrastructure
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 14 of 18

development are systematically and significantly deceptive. Cost underestimation is used strategically
to make projects appear less expensive than they are to gain approval from decision-makers to build
the projects [7,10], which could be determined by analyzing more significant samples. Other authors
mentioned that differences between studies could be related to the variation in sample size, by the
differences in the geographical area that is covered, and the project types that are included; also,
the optimism bias could be a significant cause of unrealistic estimates [26].
This study also identified the significant variables generating delays and cost overruns,
among 16 variables. With regards to the project initiation phase, through bivariate analysis,
four variables were identified as significant for both deviations: Estimated cost, project intensity,
municipality type, and year. The estimated cost (budget) was determined as significant for both
overruns in this study through multivariate analysis. The correlation between this variable and
the dependent variables is positive, which is in line with other researchers [44], who analyzed
transport infrastructure projects in Asia, confirming that greater values of contracts generate higher
cost deviations. However, other studies considering different road types reported that larger-scale
projects tend to have smaller cost overruns [19]. One possible explanation could be the level of
management in larger projects compared to smaller ones [25]. Project intensity was identified as
significant through bivariate analysis for both deviations and in the Random Forest model for time
deviation. Previous research based on stakeholder’s opinions reported “poor planning and scheduling”
as a significant factor generating time and cost deviations in infrastructure projects [45–47]. This factor
could include project intensity since a higher value represents higher deviations, indicating failures in
the project planning.
Regarding territorial planning, this research found that municipalities different than “Type 6”,
are the worst performers, being municipalities with more considerable resources. This municipality
category is related to the geographical location, for which a previous study also found significant for
cost overruns [25]. Concerning the period of time, previous research reported this variable as not
significant [10,19,25]; however, in this study, the year in which council mayors begin their term is
significant, with weakest project performance. It is a new finding that deserves future research since,
in this study, only one of the years considered corresponds to this condition, and it would also be
interesting to be able to compare this finding with the situation in other regions or countries.
With respect to the project planning phase, through bivariate analysis, the variable process type is
significant for both deviations. The most competitive process is the one with the worst performance,
which also deserves further research. Other studies have reported errors or problems in bidding and
award as a factor causing overruns [46,48]. Although in this research, only Design–Bid–Build projects
are included, other researchers have reported that alternative contracting methods affect and cost
growth and schedule growth, which should be explored by project planners [20].
Finally, with respect to the execution phase, additional time is significant for cost deviation and
additional cost for time deviation, which demonstrated the relationship between both, in line with
early studies that also showed it [49–51]. The results of the multivariate analysis also demonstrated
this relationship between cost and time performance, being the additional cost is the most important
predictor for the time overruns and the additional time for cost overrun. Besides, the multivariate
analysis also allowed identifying the original deadline as a significant variable for time deviation; in line
with previous studies that also found this, developing models to estimate time and cost overruns [52].

5. Limitations of the Research

This research is an empirical study that only includes rural road projects in Colombia.
Although further investigation in different countries or regions is necessary, the findings provide
information that should contribute to review the existing practices and compare results. This research
evaluated two aspects included in the triple constraint of cost, time, and scope, as stated in the project
management literature, in which a successful project has been defined as one that “has achieved its
technical performance, maintaining its initial schedule and budget” [6]. The project scope was not
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 15 of 18

included as an independent variable. However, all the projects are finalized and closed. It implies that
the object of the contract has been fulfilled.
This research has identified significant variables generating time and overruns included in
previous research, but also available in the database. However, project managers must also consider
other factors not included in this analysis regarding the nature of each project with practices like
risk analysis.

6. Conclusions
This research included empirical research on the performance of rural road projects in Colombia.
These projects are significant in meeting sustainable development objectives. On the positive side,
there is an important number of projects that have been developed within the time and cost initially
established. Still, the reported deviations are considerable. This study provides information on the
factors that generated them, contributing to projects developers and decision-makers in the existing
practices. The transparency in the publication of public procurement in Colombia facilitated the
development of this research, allowing for the analysis of real data on all public procurement.
Based on the statistical analysis, for the project initiation phase, it can be concluded that the
estimated cost (budget), project intensity, year, and municipality are the significant variables for
both deviations. Additionally, for time deviation, the original deadline is also a significant variable.
Project planners should consider the estimated cost and project intensity as critical factors in the
initial stages of the project life cycle; hence, higher values of them are related to more considerable
deviations. In contrast, projects with shorter durations are reporting higher time deviations in
percentage. Projects executed in the year that council mayors start their periods and those developed in
municipalities with more significant resources have the weakest performance. Therefore, project owners
must ensure permanent supervision in these cases, and an analysis of the documents generating change
orders for these conditions would be needed.
For the project planning phase, the results show that projects awarded using the competitive
process have the worst performance. This finding requires further research that analyzes the bidding
requirements and the qualification process to determine factors that explain it through new efforts and
in-depth investigation.
Moreover, for the project execution and closure phase, results confirm a relationship between cost
and time performance that is also identified considering all variables interacting together.
The authors’ contribution consists of a better understanding of the causes of delays and cost
overruns in rural road projects, by using statistical techniques and using real data sources, helping to
enhance the body of knowledge within the subject area. The results provide a useful understanding
to researchers and industry practitioners to focus on few factors and take proactive measures for the
timely delivery of public construction, especially for crucial projects such as rural roads in isolated
territories that contribute significantly to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.
Further research should focus on groups that show different behavior like competitive bidding,
including additional variables as bidding requirements, qualification systems, and the number
of bidders.
Another aspect that requires further analysis is the fact that in the year in which council mayors
start their terms, the project performance is weakest. Specific studies with the stakeholders could help
to identify the reasons and determine mitigation measures. The evaluation of quality projects and
the verification of the need identified in the initial stage was satisfied, and also could be analyzed
in further research. It implies applying research methods such as site visits, evaluation of technical
documents, and interviews with stakeholders like project users.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 16 of 18

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.G.-C., A.S-B., E.P., and J.L.P.-T.; Methodology A.G.-C., A.S.-B., E.P.,
L.M.-D. and J.L.P.-T.; Software, A.G.-C. and L.M.-D; Validation, A.G.-C., A.S.-B., L.M.-D. and E.P.; Formal Analysis,
A.G.-C., A.S.-B., E.P., L.M.-D. and J.L.P.-T.; Investigation A.G.-C. and J.L.P.-T.; Resources A.G.-C. and J.L.P.-T.;
Data Curation, A.G.-C.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, A.G.-C. A.S.-B. and L.M.-D.; Writing—Review &
Editing, A.G.-C., A.S.-B., E.P., L.M.-D. and J.L.P.-T.; Visualization, A.G.-C.; Supervision, A.S.-B., E.P., and J.L.P.-T.;
Project Administration, A.G.-C. and J.L.P.-T.; Funding Acquisition, A.G.-C. and J.L.P.-T. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by Pontificia Universidad Javeriana grant number DJE-010-2016 and
Universidad de los Andes, Faculty of Engineering.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Mihai, F.-C.; Iatu, C. Sustainable Rural Development under Agenda 2030. In Sustainability Assessment at the
21st Century; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020.
2. Cook, J.; Huizenga, C.; Petts, R.; Visser, C.; Yiu, A. The Contribution of Rural Transport to Achieve the Sustainable
Development Goals: Research Community for Access Partnership (ReCAP). Partnership on Sustainable, Low Carbon
Transportation; Oxford, UK, 2017. Available online: http://www.slocat.net/wp-content/uploads/legacy/u15/
contribution_of_rural_transport_to_the_sustainable_development_goals_paper_final.pdf (accessed on 6
June 2017).
3. Burrow, M.P.N.; Evdorides, H.; Ghataora, G.S.; Petts, R.; Snaith, M.S. The Evidence for Rural Road Technology
in Low-Income Countries. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Transp. 2016, 169, 366–377. [CrossRef]
4. Muzira, S.; de Díaz, D.H.; Mota, B.F.J. Rethinking Rural Road Infrastructure Delivery. Transp. Res. Rec. J.
Transp. Res. Board 2015, 2474, 195–202. [CrossRef]
5. Fundación Paz y Reconciliación. FUNDACION PAZ Y RECONCILIACION. Available online: https:
//pares.com.co/2016/07/28/las-vias-terciarias-del-postconflicto/ (accessed on 6 June 2017).
6. Frimpong, Y.; Oluwoye, J.; Crawford, L. Causes of Delay and Cost Overruns in Construction of Groundwater
Projects in a Developing Countries; Ghana as a Case Study. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2003, 21, 321–326. [CrossRef]
7. Flyvbjerg, B.; Skamris holm, M.K.; Buhl, S.L. How Common and How Large Are Cost Overruns in Transport
Infrastructure Projects? Transp. Rev. 2003, 23, 71–88. [CrossRef]
8. Kumaraswamy, M.M.; Chan, D.W.M. Contributors to Construction Delays. Constr. Manag. Econ. 1998, 16,
17–29. [CrossRef]
9. Iyer, K.C.; Jha, K.N. Critical Factors Affecting Schedule Performance: Evidence from Indian Construction
Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2006, 132, 871–881. [CrossRef]
10. Flyvbjerg, B.; Holm, M.S.; Buhl, S. Underestimating Costs in Public Works Projects: Error or Lie? J. Am.
Plan. Assoc. 2002, 68, 279–295. [CrossRef]
11. Shane, J.S.; Molenaar, K.R.; Anderson, S.; Schexnayder, C. Construction Project Cost Escalation Factors.
J. Manag. Eng. 2009, 25, 221–229. [CrossRef]
12. Gómez-Cabrera, A.; Ponz-Tienda, J.L.; Pellicer, E.; Sanz, A. Factors Generating Schedule Delays and Cost
Overruns in Construction Projects. In Proceedings of the VIII Encuentro Latinoamericano de Gestión Y
Economía de la Construcción, Londrina, Brasil, 23–25 October 2019.
13. Kaliba, C.; Muya, M.; Mumba, K. Cost Escalation and Schedule Delays in Road Construction Projects in
Zambia. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2009, 27, 522–531. [CrossRef]
14. Mahamid, I.; Bruland, A.; Dmaidi, N. Causes of Delay in Road Construction Projects. J. Manag. Eng. 2012,
28, 300–310. [CrossRef]
15. Kamanga, M.; Steyn, W. Causes of Delay in Road Construction Projects in Malawi. J. S. Afr. Inst. Civ. Eng.
2013, 55, 79–85.
16. Santoso, D.S.; Soeng, S. Analyzing Delays of Road Construction Projects in Cambodia: Causes and Effects.
J. Manag. Eng. 2016, 32, 05016020. [CrossRef]
17. Yang, J.-B.; Ou, S.-F. Using Structural Equation Modeling to Analyze Relationships among Key Causes of
Delay in Construction. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 2008, 35, 321–332. [CrossRef]
18. Bhargava, A.; Anastasopoulos, P.C.; Labi, S.; Sinha, K.C.; Mannering, F.L. Three-Stage Least-Squares Analysis
of Time and Cost Overruns in Construction Contracts. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2010, 136, 1207–1218. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 17 of 18

19. Huo, T.; Ren, H.; Cai, W.; Shen, G.Q.; Liu, B.; Zhu, M.; Wu, H. Measurement and Dependence Analysis of
Cost Overruns in Megatransport Infrastructure Projects: Case Study in Hong Kong. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.
2018, 144, 05018001. [CrossRef]
20. Federal Highway Administration. Alternative Contracting Method Performance in US Highway Construction;
Federal Highway Administration: Washington, DC, USA, 2018.
21. Congreso de la República. Ley 1150 de 2007; Congreso de la República: Bogotá, Colombia, 2007.
22. Gransberg, D.; Villarreal Buitrago, M. Construction Project Performance Metrics. In AACE International
Transactions; EBSCO Publishing: Ipswich, MA, USA, 2002; p. CSC.02.
23. Westland, J. The Project Management Life Cycle: A Complete Step-by-Step Methodology for Initiating, Planning,
Executing & Closing a Project Successfully; Kogan Page Publishers: London, UK, 2007.
24. Flyvberg, B.; Skamris, H.; Buhl, S. What Causes Cost Overrun in Transport Infrastructure Projects? Transp. Rev.
2004, 24, 3–18. [CrossRef]
25. Odeck, J. Cost Overruns in Road Construction—What Are Their Sizes and Determinants? Transp. Policy
2004, 11, 43–53. [CrossRef]
26. Cantarelli, C.C.; Molin, E.J.E.; Van Wee, B.; Flyvbjerg, B. Characteristics of Cost Overruns for Dutch Transport
Infrastructure Projects and the Importance of the Decision to Build and Project Phases. Transp. Policy 2012,
22, 49–56. [CrossRef]
27. Larose, D.; Larose, C.D. Data Mining and Predictive Analytics. In Data Mining and Predictive Analysis; Wiley:
Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015; pp. 31–48.
28. Alvarado, J.; Obagi, J.J. Fundamentos de Inferencia Estadística; Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana:
Bogotá D.C., Colombia, 2008.
29. Hauke, J.; Kossowski, T. Comparison of Values of Pearson’s and Spearman’s Correlation Coefficients on the
Same Sets of Data. Quaest. Geogr. 2011, 30, 87–93. [CrossRef]
30. de Winter, J.C.F.; Gosling, S.D.; Potter, J. Comparing the Pearson and Spearman Correlation Coefficients
across Distributions and Sample Sizes: A Tutorial Using Simulations and Empirical Data. Psychol. Methods
2016, 21, 273–290. [CrossRef]
31. Gatignon, H. Statistical Analysis of Management Data; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [CrossRef]
32. Goos, P.; Meintrup, D. Statistics with JMP; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016.
33. Breiman, L. Random Forests. Mach. Learn. 2001, 45, 5–32. [CrossRef]
34. Kotsiantis, S.; Kanellopoulos, D. Discretization Techniques: A Recent Survey. GESTS Int. Trans. Comput.
Sci. Eng. 2006, 32, 47–58.
35. Mooi, E.; Sarstedt, M. A Concise Guide to Market Research: The Process, Data, and Methods Using IBM SPSS
Statistics; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2011; ISBN 9783642125416.
36. Auret, L.; Aldrich, C. Interpretation of Nonlinear Relationships between Process Variables by Use of Random
Forests. Miner. Eng. 2012, 35, 27–42. [CrossRef]
37. Chakure, A. Random Forest Regression-Towards Data Science. Available online: https://towardsdatascience.
com/random-forest-and-its-implementation-71824ced454f (accessed on 3 April 2020).
38. Grömping, U. Variable Importance Assessment in Regression: Linear Regression versus Random Forest
Linked. Am. Stat. 2009, 63, 308–319. [CrossRef]
39. James, G.; Witten, D.; Hastie, T.; Tibshirani, R. An Introduction to Statistical Learning; Springer: New York, NY,
USA, 2013. [CrossRef]
40. Oshiro, T.M.; Perez, P.S.; Baranauskas, J.A. How Many Trees in a Random Forest? In Machine Learning
and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2012; Volume 7376 LNAI,
pp. 154–168. [CrossRef]
41. Congreso Republica Colombia, Ley 80 De 1993; Bogotá, Colombia; 1993. Available online: http://www.suin-
juriscol.gov.co/viewDocument.asp?ruta=Leyes/1790106 (accessed on 3 April 2020).
42. Bohórquez, J.; Mejía, G. Relationship Between Cost Overruns and Complexity in Engineering Projects:
A Mixed Approach. In Proceedings of the Viii Encuentro Latinoamericano de Gestión Y Economía de la
Construcción, Londrina, Brasil, 23–25 October 2019.
43. Vallejo-Borda, J.A.; Gutierrez-Bucheli, L.A.; Pellicer, E.; Ponz-Tienda, J.L. Behavior in Terms of Delays and
Cost Overrun of the Construction of Public Infrastructure In. Sibragec Elagec 2015, 2015, 66–73. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 7377 18 of 18

44. Park, Y.I.; Papadopoulou, T.C. Causes of Cost Overruns in Transport Infrastructure Projects in Asia:
Their Significance and Relationship with Project Size. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2012, 2, 195–216.
[CrossRef]
45. Assaf, S.A.; Al-Khalil, M.; Al-Hazmi, M.; Odeh, A.M.; Battaineh, H.T.; Elinwa, A.U.; Joshua, M.; Gündüz, M.;
Nielsen, Y.; Özdemir, M.; et al. Causes of Delay in Construction Projects in the Oil and Gas Industry in the
Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: A Case Study. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2006, 31, 171–181. [CrossRef]
46. Bagaya, O.; Song, J. Empirical Study of Factors Influencing Schedule Delays of Public Construction Projects
in Burkina Faso. J. Manag. Eng. 2016, 32, 05016014. [CrossRef]
47. Batool, A.; Abbas, F. Reasons for Delay in Selected Hydro-Power Projects in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK),
Pakistan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 73, 196–204. [CrossRef]
48. Lo, T.Y.; Fung, I.W.; Tung, K.C. Construction Delays in Hong Kong Civil Engineering Projects. J. Constr.
Eng. Manag. 2006, 132, 636–649. [CrossRef]
49. Kaka, A.; Price, A.D.F. Relationship between Value and Duration of Construction Projects.
Constr. Manag. Econ. 1991, 9, 383–400. [CrossRef]
50. Kumaraswamy, M.M.; Chan, D.W.M. Determinants of Construction Duration. Constr. Manag. Econ. 1995, 13,
209–217. [CrossRef]
51. Chan, A.P.C. Time-Cost Relationship of Public Sector Projects in Malaysia. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2001, 19,
223–229. [CrossRef]
52. Anastasopoulos, P.C.; Labi, S.; Bhargava, A.; Mannering, F.L. Empirical Assessment of the Likelihood and
Duration of Highway Project Time Delays. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2012, 138, 390–398. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Copyright of Sustainability (2071-1050) is the property of MDPI Publishing and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.